BEMIDJI, Minn. (AP) — Ojibwe band members went fishing before last year’s opener to force a treaty dispute into court, but the state still hasn’t brought charges, and the issue is ongoing even as the 2011 opener approaches.

The Leech Lake and White Earth bands have been fighting for the right to fish and hunt in northern Minnesota without government interference. They say an 1855 treaty with the federal government exempts them from observing the state’s hunting and fishing seasons and other regulations.

Minnesota Public Radio reported Wednesday that the two bands recently created a conservation code they hope will one day regulate not only hunting and fishing for band members on reservations, but across much of northern Minnesota. The code would go as far as to regulate off-reservation spearing and netting on some lakes.

Mike Swan, White Earth’s director of natural resources, said the tribes want to negotiate and aren’t looking for an ugly court battle like the one between the state and the Mille Lacs band. In that case more than a decade ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the state.

“People hear that the tribes are getting their treaty rights and they think that the Indians are going to come and take all their fish away,” Swan said. “Well, that’s not the case. We want to make sure this is done in a good way and properly.”

The bands want to co-manage resources within the treaty area with the Department of Natural Resources and to have the power to issue hunting and fishing permits. They also want violators to go to tribal rather than state court.

During last year’s rally on Lake Bemidji, roughly 100 people demonstrated by setting nets on the lake the day before the opener. None have been prosecuted.

The case against one of the tribal members, Aaron White Sr., is in the hands of Beltrami County Attorney Tim Faver, who has twice asked the attorney general’s office to take it. Faver argues that it’s a constitutional question with statewide implications. But a spokesman for the attorney general’s office said misdemeanor cases belong at the county level.

Rally organizer Bob Shimek, of the White Earth reservation, blamed the inaction on a lack of resources.

“Right now the state is broke,” Shimek said. “Everybody is broke. Nobody has the money, the millions, the tens of millions of dollars it takes to go into a court action like this.”

Tribal members said they’ve spoken with DNR officials regarding treaty rights, but DNR spokesman Chris Niskanen wouldn’t confirm that. He said the DNR wants county attorneys to prosecute game law violations, regardless of who commits them.

“I think everybody would like to see some resolution,” he said. “We’re hopeful that the larger treaty issues can find an appropriate resolution through the judicial process.”

(© Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

Comments (216)
  1. Amos says:

    Headline says “1885 Treaty.”

    Article says “1855 Treaty.”

    Which is it?

      1. KM says:

        What matters is that ‘CCO has lost their credibility and their professionalism. Most every article I read on here has a typo.

  2. annie says:

    I’m glad they are fighting for their rights. The US Government did not honor the signed treaty

    1. Chris says:

      Give us a break annie…

      We are fine with it if:

      They use canoes, wood spears, and torches.

      They catch only what they can consume (not sell).

      They save the eggs from the spawning fish.

      They allow us to open up gambling and casinos.

      Otherwise, forget it because all bets are off!

      1. Learn the Truth says:

        So basically, you’re okay with the contract as long as you get to make other stipulations not previously agreed to? Yeah, sounds fair right? /sarcasm

        1. ryan says:

          Im sorry Mr learn the truth but laws change over time, and this one needs a changing. Your argument is misleading, if you think about it, we have been changing and modifying laws for a long time. You imply that once laws are made, they should never be changed. Do we still use the laws of 1950? NO! Do you think the laws today wont change in the future?????

          1. Learn the Truth says:

            This has absolutely nothing to do with a law and everything to do with a CONTRACT. This is a contract between two parties, no more, no less. So now trying to change the stipulations of that contract because you don’t agree or are not a party to that contract is what’s misleading. So you can stop arguing about changing laws as that is a completely misleading argument.

          2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

            Blah Blah Blah…for every Native that would enforce their rights there are 50 more non natives who come up there and take way more resources out of the lakes and stuff each day. get a grip. I see it every day..

      2. Chris is ignorant says:

        Canoes, wood spears, and tourches? Chris you are ignorant and inciting.

      3. hoover says:

        I agree with Chris – uphold the treaty, however, they must fish the way the did when the treaty was signed. Let them go out in birch bark canoes and fish..I’m fine with that….

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          And again I ask, where in the treaty does it state the tribes are restricted to using only the current harvest methods in place when the treaty was signed. I said it before and I’ll say it again, the 2nd amendment was written when we only have front load muzzle rifles, so should those be the only guns covered by that amendment?

          1. Hunter / Fisherman says:

            Learn the Truth,
            You still fail to make the connection. Everyone outside the tribe is limited by the rules set in place by the DNR. Slot limits, Bag limits, seasons in which one can hunt and fish. These were set in place to help preserve the natural resources we love in this state. That being said, the treaty was written in a time where advances in modern time were not even thought of. I guarantee the use of motor boats with nets to capture as much fish as humanly possible was not intended. Non-Tribe members have to follow guidelines that make scence for today’s equipment and enviroment, not to mention safety of others. Also, where in the treaty of 1855 does it say to use commercial fishing boats with 60hp Mercs and gill nets? I’m so tired of your reference to that as your basis of defense.

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              Where is the treaty does it say we CAN’T use new equipment? You keep claiming that because it doesn’t specifically say we can use new equipment, we need to stick with what was used when the treaty was signed. But the inverse is also true. What in the treaty is saying we’re limited to only harvesting how it was done in 1837? Turn about is fair play so until you can show me where it specifically states we are limited to your version of the treaty, I will keep doing as is the conservation code for the tribes.

              Tribes are also held to guidelines that make sense for today’s environment, such as the requirements our equipment must meet, the amount of allowable harvest that is safe, even the dates and times recommended for netting. Why do you think this is a free-for-all for the tribes with no rules or obligations?

              As for everyone outside the tribe being limited, well, everyone in WI is limited to WI laws and regulations regarding harvesting and fishing, including on shared resources (like the St. Croix River, for example) and everyone in MN is limited to MN laws for the exact same river. So to compensate for this, both the WI DNR and the MN DNR NEGOTIATE TOGETHER what rules and obligations both residents of WI and MN will be held to. Are they the same? No. The point is, the rules are set by two different governments for the same purpose, conservation of the shared resource. The same can be said for the netting done by tribes under their treaty rights.

  3. Hunter / Fisherman says:

    I’m sure in 1855 the use of motor boats and nets were used as they are today!!!!! Get with the times! The northern half of Minnesota’s hunting and fishing would be destroyed! Also they don’t get to benefit from public money that re-stocks lakes and manages state forests for wildlife management that has helped replenished game species for years. How’s the fishing on Red Lake as of late???? Now The Ojibwe want to net out all the other northern lakes, Hunt deer at will. What happened to only killing what you can eat. Must be a lot of fish eaten on the reservation! I’m sure all of the fish caught in gill nets are eaten.

    1. Todd W. Olson says:

      So, Mr. Hunter/Fisherman, if I understand you correctly, you only believe in honoring your end of a bargain as long as it works to your benefit. Did I miss something? Where I come from, a deal is a deal.

      1. Charlie says:

        Can you tell us what the deal was???

        Also, if they are so concerned with “their” environment, why do they proceed to ruin it by taking spawning fish and using gill nets???

        If you are weighing what is fair and what is not, you better open your own eyes!

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          A fish removed from the lake during the spring, summer, fall or winter is still one fish removed from the lake, and potentially a fish that could spawn later. So how is the natives netting “ruin[ing] it by taking spawning fish and using gill nets???” The end result is the fish are removed right?

          1. ROy says:

            One fish removed in the spring is 100 times worse than summer or fall. If you remove a fish in the spring the eggs in the fish will not reproduce.

            1. Art B says:

              ROy, one fish removed from a lake at ANY time of the year is still one fish removed from a lake. ALL female fish are potentially able to produce MILLIONS of eggs over their lives, so just one single fish removed from a lake equals the removal of potentially MILLIONS more fish in the future. But, it was a nice straw-0man argument, ROy.

              1. eastside_evil says:

                Art, why do we have fishing seasons for the white folks to follow that protect the fish during spawn?

                Nice NO argument, Art.

                1. Learn the Truth says:

                  So are you upset because the tribes are allowed to harvest according to their own conservation code?

                  And Art is correct, a fish taken today could have spawned tomorrow, preventing future fish from developing. So when the fish is taken is a non-starter argument to draw attention away from the real debate.

                2. eastside_evil says:

                  “So are you upset because the tribes are allowed to harvest according to their own conservation code?”

                  Where did I say I was upset about anything?

                3. Learn the Truth says:

                  That is what I was asking. Are you upset tribes have their own conservation code they utilize for their harvesting rights which is different than the “fishing seasons for the white folks to follow”?

                4. eastside_evil says:

                  Not upset enough to protest a treaty.

                  But the idea to not take gamefish during spawn was initiated for conservation.

                  By not adhering to it, I would assume either we’re being lied to about the dangers to the population by taking egg-carrying female fish, or damage will be done to the population BY doing it. Does that not seem a reasonable assumption?

                5. Learn the Truth says:

                  Considering the tribes and the MN DNR fishery biologist work together to conduct the studies of the lake, which is the data used to help set the safe harvest limit and there has not been any mention of the tribes destroying the fishery due to their harvest, I don’t see the problem.

                  A fish removed today is a fish that cannot spawn tomorrow or in the future, so claiming that netting is wrong because it’s done during the spawning season is misdirection. That same fish you take during the summer season could potentially spawn next spring if you hadn’t taken it, correct? I don’t see the difference. It appears to be more of a delayed removal of the potential spawn when you do it, that I’ll give you, but it’s still a removal none the less.

                6. eastside_evil says:

                  You’re not acknowledging the logic behind my argument. If I blow up a school bus full of kids, I’m not just stopping a school bus from making it to the school.

                  A fish having eggs will have fish THIS year. Those fish will then spawn the next year if they survive.

                  The “one fish out, one fish gone” theory is not valid during spawn because of this.

                  If taking spawning fish is not going to damage the fisheries or the fish population, are you suggesting the law is doing nothing?

                7. Learn the Truth says:

                  And you are not acknowledging my point as well. The fish you catch this summer will no longer be able to spawn. They will not be able to swim to their spawning grounds next spring, then will not be able to release their eggs or sperm, they will not be there to supply any future fish to the lake. The only difference between what you take and what the tribes take is the tribal members might be preventing the spawn from happening this year, but you’re preventing the spawn from happening next year. Again, a fish taken today or tomorrow is still a fish taken that cannot provide for any future spawns. It’s all semantics and a complete misdirection.

                  And if taking spawning fish through netting is hurting the fish population, then please explain why the safe harvest level has RISEN year after year on Lake Mille Lacs. We have not changed the times we harvest, nor the way we harvest since 2000, yet the safe harvest limit has not been reduced but has GROWN. So, what does that tell you? For me, it says the argument about taking spawning walleye is a complete non-argument meant to inflame emotions instead of looking at the facts, but you’re welcome to your own opinion.

    2. Learn the Truth says:

      Oh, and we can’t forget how destroyed all the lakes will be, right? Hmmm… seems Lake Mille Lacs has been harvested by the tribes for over 10 years now, yet it’s not destroyed, but that must be a fluke. Yeah, that’s it, Lake Mille Lacs is a fluke and all of the northern hunting and fishing will be destroyed. /sarcasm

      Chicken Little things much?

      1. Chuck says:

        We can provide you with a long list of lakes that have been over fished (netted) by the natives… there is no regard for common sense or their own culture!!!

        We can help you learn the truth if you wish…

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          By all means, start providing that long list. I’ll wait here with baited breath.

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              You’re response is to name a lake attached to Red Lake? Yeah, still waiting for that big list. Good thing I didn’t say I would hold my breath as I would have died by now from the wait.

              1. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

                GOOD ONE!!!!..and look what red lake rez did…turned their lake back around with in what 10 yrs!….and that is a big lake. i saw some whopper fish brought outta that lake…. which you cant find no where else in this state…tourism is the ONLY reason leech lakes fish supply is depleting. Not from members excerising their treaty rights. people are so ignorant and greedy.for every 1 native there is 50 non natives on these lakes.

        2. Art B says:

          And others can provide YOU with a long list of lakes that have been overfished by White “sportsmen”. We can help YOU learn the truth, if you wish………

      2. dlq says:

        Yeah, no slot limits of like no fish to be taken except in this 3/4 of an inch at all.

    3. sc00ter says:

      The more fish they net the more booze they can trade it for. Can’t BS me I see you standing outside the liquor store waiting for the doors to open with your bucket of walleyes.

      1. pam branchaud says:

        oh good grief! standing right next to you with your ‘will work for food’ sign

      2. Art B says:

        How convenient of you to ignore the ten white guys for every Injun outside every bar……

    4. chris says:

      Ha can’t wait till we get our way u jealous prick. lol

  4. mpls sux says:

    Tired of others complaining of equality, but yet they get more bs than most of us do. Equality- pay taxes, no more sovereignty. I don’t care if “our people” took your land. War is war. It was a long time ago- stop living in the past.

    1. Me says:

      But look at what you’re trying to do today. Why shouldn’t they want their treaty honored?

      1. dlq says:

        Hey Me,
        Times change, enough if enough it seems the natives want it both ways in my opinion every treaty should be thrown out and assimilate totally not when it is convenient for them.

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          So you’re going to argue that it’s time to take all the rights away from the natives as you can’t have them so they shouldn’t either. Is that it? Well, WI residents have some rights we don’t, so should we force them to assimilate into MN because that’s not fair? It’s not a matter of convenience, it’s a matter of sovereign governments with their own rules and regulations to follow.

          1. dlq says:

            Who cares about Wisconsin, I was born here, work here, pay taxes here and fish here damn right I want everyone to follow the same rules as I have to follow. I say treat everybody the same no matter who they are.

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              And you’re trying to enforce your rules onto another government. Same as if you tried to enforce your rules onto the people of WI. So, what gives you the right to try and enforce your rules on a sovereign government? Just because you think everyone should have to follow the same rules? Goes back to my point that WI has different rules than MN, etc.

  5. rich says:

    What dont they want, maybe if they had jobs they wouldnt have time for this,some do have jobs but most just think they are entitled to everything free because of something that happened years and years ago. Live in the present not the past,no what what the government does it wont make it right to them,if we really want to do somehting about it quit going to their casinos and wasting your money that gives them the power they have now.

  6. White Guy says:

    It’s all about the money!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    ………..Rights my hinder.
    Don’t be fooled by greed!

  7. Mike says:

    Please people, keep bringing more ignorant comments – makes all of us look like ignorant bigots here in the great state of MN. Read the treaty then look at what they are asking for before passing outrageous judgements. This has nothing to do with gambling or welfare. Your ancestors used flintlocks when the Second Amendment was passed, so if you want a permit to carry, that’s what YOU get!

    1. Hunter / Fisherman says:

      Yes my ancestors used flint locks, and cain poles. My ancestors also followed the gaming and fishing rules and limit laws. This also has nothing to do with the permit to carry law!

      1. Learn the Truth says:

        You’re right, this has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. But this has everything to do with the CONTRACT signed by the government with the tribes. Just because you’re not a party to that contract nor do you agree with those contract’s details, that does not make that contract illegal.

        As for the gaming and fishing rules and limit laws: what makes you think the tribal members aren’t following their tribal code? Or are you more upset because you are limited to the State of MN code while tribal members are limited to the regulations spelled out within the treaty of 1855, which isn’t the same code you’re bound to? Is that it? Jealousy?

        1. The Real Truth says:

          So what if in the year 2050 there are litterally only about 10,000 fish left in Minnesota. Most of our Natural resources are gone.

          Should everyone else sit back and let the Natives whip out the remaining fish because of a 1855 contract? That doesnt make sense does it?

          I know this is an extreme example….but the point is ALOT of stuff changes in 200 years. We must remeber our past….but we cannot live in it (natives & whites alike). In order to survive and flourish, we must be fluid and able to adapt to our surrounding as they stand TODAY. Thats how the human race moved forward as a species. There is a reason you dont use the same guns & poles as you did in 1855….so why would you assume its okay to fish like we did in 1855. We know alot more about our natural resources and preservation than we did back then.

          You see my point….I know you are stuck on the fact you have a “contract”…and you are right. You do. But both sides need to come together to figure out a long-term fair solution to this problem. And that can never happen if one of the parties is not willing to budge.

          The government isn’t doing it to be mean or take advantage of these people. It is looking out for the good of the entire state TODAY. They can still use nets and stuff….they just cant rape the hell out of fish whenever they want and decimate our natural wildlife population. And don’t be naïve…the Natives are supporting this for COMMERCIAL reasons….not to try and feed their tribe.

          1. Learn the Truth says:

            @The Real Truth
            Throwing future what ifs is moot. I could say what if the world ends tomorrow because the sun blows up? It has the same effect.

            As for your point, I think you made my point yourself. Like you said “ALOT of stuff changes in 200 years. We must remeber our past….but we cannot live in it…” and you also said “In order to survive and flourish, we must be fluid and able to adapt to our surrounding as they stand TODAY.” So, as you know, the tribal members are using current harvest methods to harvest according to their contract, yes? So how is that not evolving? How is that not adapting to their surrounding as they stand TODAY as you put it yourself?

            And I’m not being naive, but I also refuse to accuse someone of doing something illegal, like commercially fishing Mille Lacs. If you have proof, please enlighten us all, otherwise keep your accusations to yourself as it demeans your entire argument.

        2. Hunter / Fisherman says:

          Learn the Truth,
          No, I’m more upset in the fact that me and my buddies can’t go fishing with nets too! …LOL
          Look, I’m just saying the treaty was written way back when boats and nets were not used for fishing. I abide by the rules, in fact I only have my limit in the freezer at all times, and catch and release for the sport. Lets adapt the contract to modern day, or allow the tribe to use wooden canoes and spears to catch the fish. I’m all for upholding the treaty, but lets be fair with the modern day tools used to take advantage of the treaty. Also, Mille Lacs upholds the fishing numbers because the Minnesota DNR re-stocks the lake, along with all the others.

          1. Learn the Truth says:

            The MN DNR does not restock Lake Mille Lacs. Jeeze that is one rumor I wish would die already.

            As for the treaty itself, no where in the treaty does it state the tribal members are obligated to only use harvest methods of that time period. If someone has read something different, please point me to it as the language of the treaty says other wise. Here’s the link:


            1. Hunter / Fisherman says:

              Learn The Truth,
              That’s why I think the treaty should be updated for todays gaming methods. Just curious what the Indian Tribes do with all the fish they net?

              1. Learn the Truth says:

                I can’t speak for all natives, but I can say what goes into my net goes to my family and the elders who can no longer harvest due to age or illness. Per the teachings of my elders, I am responsible to help provide for those who cannot until I’m no longer able. Then the younger generation will provide for me.

                I’m also still not seeing where the treaty says ANYTHING about the harvest methods, so are you advocating renegotiating the treaty to include today’s harvest methods or to exclude them?

                1. Just an Observation says:

                  Wow….hunter/fisherman made a really good point and seems like you dont get it.

                  I totally get what you’re saying too…..but when the treaty was signed it did not take into account the advances in technology.

                  So do you feel its fair that the Natives fish with 2011 equipment under 1855 treaty? That doesnt even make sense!!!! I think the hard part in this is the history of mistrust and broken agreements between the two sides. All that history gets in the way of commen sense. Because i believe, if you just look at this one issue, and toss out the past for one second… will see that it doesn’t make sense.

                2. Learn the Truth says:

                  @Just an Observation
                  What I don’t understand is how others keep trying to make the harvest methods a part of the treaty when they were never a part of the treaty to begin with. IF the treaty said something along the lines of tribes are allowed to harvest with current methods ONLY, then you may have a point. But to arbitrarily add requirements now that are not part of the original language appears you just want to make it more difficult for tribes to utilize the treaty. Is that your intent?

                3. Learn the Truth says:

                  @Just an Observation
                  What you said also goes back to the similar statement in this thread about the 2nd amendment. That was written during a time we didn’t have semi-automatic weapons and automatic handguns, yet we’re still allowed to have those things today BECAUSE of that amendment. With your logic, since those things weren’t around when the 2nd amendment was written, then those weapons should not be covered by that amendment. Or am I seeing things incorrectly?

                4. Just an Observation says:

                  I totally get your point. And no, that is not my intent. I want this thing to be as fair for all parties as possible.

                  I just am saying that you cannot look at the 1855 treaty in a vaccum. But that is just my opinion. And it goes for other antiquated legislation too. The second ammendent is ridiculous as it is practiced today. I highly doubt our founder fathers wrote that to mean they are cool with ordinary citizens sleeping with a MAC 10 with an extended clip under their pillow. It just doesn’t make sense.

                  So, to sum it up….doing what’s right and best….and what is fair, are two totally different things for this issue.

                  If you want to be fair….100% honor the treaty and let the Natives wipe out the fish population if they so desire. But this way, you are no better than the white man….but you financially benefit.

                  If you want to do what’s best and right….find some common ground and place logical, reasonable limits on the fishing and hunting. But this way, you are morally superior by taking the high ground….but you get screwed financially.

                  Depends on your final objectives and how your people want to proceed and develop as a culture.

                5. Just an Observation says:

                  @ Learn the Truth.

                  I just wrote a long comment, but this stupid website didnt take it.

                  Your analogy about the second ammendment is perfect. I agree that too should be revised. It doesnt make sense that the founding fathers were cool with an average citizen sleeping with a MAC 10 with extended clip.

                  At the end of the day the Natives have a choice….

                  1) Do whats right and best for nature….and place some logical, commen sense limits on how much you can harvest…..but suffer finacially. This would require the Natives to yet again take the moral high ground and compromise.

                  2) Do whats fair…..and wipe out the fish population if you so desire (i know you dont desire that, but just illustrating that fair is fair, and you have an valid agreement so that if you wanted to do that, you could). This would make the Natives just as greed, unfair and underhanded as the white man.

                6. Learn the Truth says:

                  @Just an Observation
                  Here is an article showing there are limits to the harvest and the tribes are not doing it willy nilly:


                  As you can see from this article, this allocation or quota is set by the MN DNR, GLIFWC, and the tribes, although this is for Mille Lacs and not the northern lakes. Now, if this type of arrangement can be made for Mille Lacs, I don’t see why it can’t be made for other lakes.

                  Does this meet your two points?

                7. Slim says:

                  Just give it up already and buy yourself some nice fillets down at the store…

                  You know that is what you would prefer to do, except that you just want to rub our noses in this just because you believe that you can.

                  I know of some of your tribe that just plain WASTE and that is unacceptable!

                  Your ancestors would be so dissappointed in how you manage this and how you miss the real opportunities before you…

                8. Learn the Truth says:

                  Seeing as I’m actually doing as my elders teach, how is this wasteful? Or is it more you’re upset because I can and you can’t? As for management, I feel the tribes do a wonderful job co-managing the Mille Lacs fishery with the MN DNR and GLIFWC.

                  I would apologize for your hurt feelings, but I’m not sorry for taking advantage of my heritage and for being allowed the opportunity to provide for my family and for some elders. But that’s just me I guess. You can call it wasteful all you like, but as you are speaking from a place of jealousy, I will take your comments with a grain of salt.

            2. Learn the Truth says:

              Here’s a link to the MN DNR report showing the status of Lake Mille Lacs:


              As you can see from the report (about halfway down the page), the only fish stocked into Lake Mille Lacs is Muskellunge.

              Just food for thought and possibly to help bad rumors die.

              1. Charlie says:

                That may be true for the past few years, but go back in time a little further…

                We know that you can… as far back as the 1800’s when it works for you!!!

                1. Learn the Truth says:

                  Please point me to the link that allows me to view MN DNR reports further back than the one I found and I will be happy to take a look.

                  But as you can see from the link I posted, those reports go back to 2004 and it shows walleye have not been stocked in Lake Mille Lacs. So, if we’re netting the lake to death, which we’ve been doing it legally since 2000, where is the evidence as the safe harvest level is over 500,000 pounds without the MN DNR stocking the lake?

              1. Learn the Truth says:

                That’s the same link I posted.

    2. dlq says:

      Hey Mike,
      The NON natives back in the day did not need a permit or a license or a had a time limit to hunt or fish either, the rules changed for them they surely can change for the inidians.

      1. Learn the Truth says:

        The rules changed for you because your government changed them. My government didn’t and why do you think it should be up to you that MN should change the laws of another government? To suit your pity party because you can’t have what someone else has?

        1. dlq says:

          It should, most treaties say at the behest of the president or some same language, one day there will be one with enough guts to stop this. I would like to see the tribes lose dollar for dollarwhat they get in federal money that they gain in casieno money. OH and dont get hurt or assulted sexually or otherwise while at the casino the tribal console will just throw it out. Like anyone else the tribes abuse what was given to them and take and take and take. Time for all of that to stop.

          1. Learn the Truth says:

            “one day there will be one with enough guts to stop this.” Good luck with that.

            As for the rest of your statement, what exactly does that have to do with fish harvesting? And it sounds more like you’re very bitter. Do you have any arguments to do with the article at hand, or are you just here for the native bashing?

        2. dlq says:

          As a side bar, MY government IS your government like it or not.

          1. Learn the Truth says:

            Last time I checked, the State of MN is not allowed to govern tribes, so how is that my government?

    3. Paul says:

      Not a bad analogy really. The technology involved shouldn’t have anything to do with their treaty rights. Treaties are after all, supposed to be unbreakable agreements between sovereign nations. I value my Second Amendment rights and I certainly prefer my K frame snubby to trying to shove a flintlock down my pants.

  8. Bee says:

    lets run the indians off the land!

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      Your ancestors tried that once already and look how well that turned out, but good luck with that.

      1. The real truth says:

        Actually pretty good i think. We got your land, resources and skills….all the while we gave you firewater and cast you onto some tiny plots of worthless land. Am i missing something here?

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          @The real truth
          And wouldn’t you know it, the tribes are now the owners of multi-million dollar (if not multi-billion dollar) corporations that run casinos. Yeah, you can keep the land; we’ll just take your money instead then turn around and use the money you so willing hand us to buy back the land while using our own regulations to harvest from the land we gave you earlier without paying you for it.

          Am I missing something here? Who got the short end of that stick here in MN?

          1. Jim says:

            As a person without a drop of Native American blood in his veins, people like “The real truth” make me ashamed to be a human. Disgusting.

            1. The real truth says:

              Then you are ignorant Jim. You should be ashamed because of Bee. Then “learn the truth” answered her with some tounge and cheek response about “you already tried that once and look how good that turned out”.

              I was simply stating that it did indeed turn out pretty good for our ancestors. I didn’t do anything to any Natives, i don’t advocate we “run them off our land” like Bee did. I simply tried to be objective and report history as i see it. The white man screwed the Natives royal… from the white man’s perspective….it did work out pretty good for our ancestors.

          2. The real truth says:

            LOL…so sad. You can keep your casinos. It is literally the only thing you guys having going for you. And that is only for a few, select tribes. The rest live in abject poverty and squaller. You’re rates of alcohol and drug addictions are through the roof…..way, way, way higher than the rest of the state. You have no continuity among tribes, and bicker with one another.

            So keep your couple hundred million and your casinos. I’d still take the land that turned out to be worth TRILLIONS upon TRILLIONS….all the power….physical dominance…and bragging rights over your casinos:)

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              @The real truth
              If you have such bragging rights, then why are we even here? I mean, since this is so minor compared to everything you seem to think you have, then why is this thread always full of people screaming and yelling about the tribal monopoly on casinos? And why are we even debating the tribes having rights you don’t have if it’s such a minor thing?

              Maybe because what you seem to think you have is actually nothing, yet the tribes have more, so you need to whine and cry until it’s taken away. Yep, that sounds about right.

              As for continuity, is there continuity between MN and WI or do both have their own governments and their own laws and their own disagreements about resources shared by both (St. Croix River)? Yeah, let’s say the tribes have no continuity, even though we don’t have it ourselves. Hypocritical much?

          3. Chris says:

            So even you want it both ways too….

            If you had to choose between your millions or a few stinky fish, we know where your real loyalties lie!!!

            Why don’t you turn this around, use a little tact, and you could come out the hero here…

            But you are too selfish and short-sighted, so you may the ulltimate loser in this yet!

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              Want what both ways? I thought there were two contracts, one that gave the natives casinos and one that gave the natives hunting, fishing and gathering rights. Now you’re claiming we are supposed to choose? Where’s the logic in that as we already have both contracts?

            2. jon says:

              Why don’t you stay the hell where you belong, on your land. try paying taxes and supporting yourselves for once.Stop whining about what hhappened 150 yrs ago. war is war people lose things and others are taken.If your upset that you lost call someone who cares. personally I’m sick of supporting your drunk and worthless asses. Get jobs on your reservations pay taxes to your own goverment and stop mooching everything YOU think your entitled to because in some of our eyes you don’t deserve shit let alone speceil rights off your reservations. we could always come onto your land and enforce the 14 amendmement which gives equallity to all..I bet you wouldn’t like it to much. you run ads in the newspapers and state openly that preference will be given to indians.well I don’t have to come out and directly say it but I could find alot of reasons to prefer whites,African americans,hispanics and basically anybody but natives.Don’t start something you’ll never be able to finish.

              1. Learn the Truth says:

                So basically, you are arguing that because we retained these rights under the treaty 150 years ago, we shouldn’t be able to use them today? Really? So, should we void the entire treaty and give everyone everything back they ceded in the treaty, including giving the tribes back the land they ceded while keeping the hunting, fishing and gathering rights?

                This isn’t a matter of we lost a war so we shouldn’t be able to ask for things now. This is a matter of my ancestors ceded their land (sold it, bartered it, whichever term you feel you understand better) in exchange for certain rights as payment. Those rights still hold true today.

                As for the rest of your argument, I think you need to speak to someone about your bitter feelings toward a group of people who I’m sure you feel have slighted you in some way, but that still does not justify your response here. As for starting something we will never be able to finish? We started this same fight in Mille Lacs and we did finish it, and it was resolved in our favor, so you can decide for yourself whether we completed what we started.

        2. Anona Mouse says:

          Are you missing something here? I suspect, the real truth, that you’re missing something every where.

  9. Bob says:

    Let’s get together and stop this before the tribes take it to far . Ban casinos and support racinos !!!

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      Oh yes, this is about casinos and not about fish harvesting. I must have missed that in the original story. Thank you for enlightening me. /sarcasm

  10. Bruce says:

    My problem with trying to hold the government to old Indian treaties is it’s fairly common knowledge they never negotiated in good faith. So in reality, all the old treaties should be ruled null and void and new, more realistic and fair treaties, should be negotiated. Or we could acknowledge we both share the country now and stop with the treaties and reservations and start treating each other like equals and human beings.
    But if you do that, then all the perks the tribes now have because of the old treaties go away, so it’s likely this childish whining and fighting will continue for years to come.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      So, in other words, you’re advocating getting rid of all the “old treaties” because the tribes are actually using them now?

      Also, here’s the other side to your coin; if we get rid of the treaties, because they weren’t negotiated in good faith, then does that mean the tribes get to have the land back they ceded in the treaties and we start negotiating from the beginning? Or are you advocating the tribes lose the land they ceded in the treaties AND the rights they were granted in exchange for the land and we’ll leave the tribes with nothing? Could you clarify your point?

  11. wtdbuck says:

    itis up to the president to decide if he will let them keep hunting and fishing off the res. read the treaty and you will see.

  12. william says:

    Wow. Sounds racist to me. Get your facts straight before you put it on paper. The tribes have been spearing and netting in Wisconsin for the past 25 years and the lakes still have fish, the woods still have deer. Don’t talk about the 4.5 miles of washed up trash left on lake Mille Lacs from ice fisherman. Don’t talk about the bass tournaments where 90% of fish released back in the water die. Oh, thats right, the “sportsmen” of Minnesota are exempt from polluting our waters and releasing fish for money.
    The tribes in Wisconsin restock a lot of lakes with walleyes and do alot with the environment. Get over it. Oh, and another thing, the state of Minnesota wants to expand gambling to downtown mpls by building a large casino. Doesn’t that “break” another compact the tribes had with the state not to allow casino’s off reservation. But, yet thats ok to do? Shut your cake hole.

    1. Hunter / Fisherman says:

      You sound like an educated tree hugger! You don’t seem to know anything about the sport other than what you read on PETA’s web site. Please don’t lump all sportsman with leaving the garbage on the lakes. More fish die in gill nets than can possibly be eaten, than would ever die in a bass tourny from catch and release.

    2. eastside_evil says:

      “Don’t talk about the bass tournaments where 90% of fish released back in the water die.”

      Please validate this statistic with something legitimate. Show me.

  13. Revdude says:

    How many thousands of pounds of fish do they take now.. What happens when a kid is running through the woods in the summer and get shot by a stray bullet from and hunter that everyone knows should not be hunting in the summer. Do we nedd to have orange on when we go on nature hikes now. What will happen when they start to gill net the BWCA?. We gave them the rights to casinos so they didn’t have to rape the land they say they love. Our legal system does not work when someone is injured on tribel land, What do you think will happen when we give them free unobstucted hunting and fishing rights to northern minnesota. What about the person that has managed the deer in the area for years so they can harvest big bucks instead of small spikes?, Will he get a say in what happens with his years of hard work?

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      Wow, you have a whole lot of what ifs with no substantiating commentary. What if the sun explodes tomorrow? What if the tribes have an enormous uprising and take back all the land? What if some tribal members do something really insane, like get elected president?

      Yeah, anyone can throw out straw men arguments, but it only inflames emotions with no real argument behind it. I know that was your intent, but why do it?

      As for the casinos, those compacts were negotiated with the tribes because many, many government officials from the state didn’t believe the tribes would be able to make a go of casinos. In other words, the state planned for tribes to fail, but the tribes prospered instead. Gaming compacts had nothing to do with hunting, fishing or gathering rights guaranteed by treaties.

      1. Chuck says:

        Learn the truth,

        It appears that you are a one man band…

        You have all the answers I guess because you answer to everyone’s comments, regardless…

        Do you live in a teepee?

        I doubt it and I know Indians that deny that they are Native Americans…

        How sad is that?!

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          And what exactly does your comment have to do with this debate? Or is it more trying to inflame emotions to steer away from a losing argument?

  14. tom says:

    While a treaty remains in effect it was written a long time ago, such as our constitution, meanwhile the amendments of it get changed all the time. I thinks if the indians want what they want maybe its time to amend a 125 year old treaty. The treaty did not mention motors on their boats, in fact it was birch bark canoe. So lets take the treaty by word, Not by what they state today. What was signed 125 years ago means the same today. Live by it.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      Please show me in the treaty where it states the natives are to only use birch bark canoes for harvesting, then I’ll concede you have a point.

      What, you mean the treaty says NOTHING about the means for the harvesting? Really?

      Nice straw man attempt, but still fail.

      1. Chuck says:

        Learn the Truth,

        You must remember that your ancestors moved into North American in our RECENT history!

        It was not that long ago that you came into this land and laid claim to it as your own…

        Did you share it with anyone else and did you get a treaty signed then?

        Go back to Asia and make them pay you for forcing you to find new hunting grounds…

        You have not been here forever like you try to make us believe!!!!

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          Please show me where I claim we have been here forever. I would love to see that comment.

    2. Jim says:

      “What was signed 125 years ago means the same today. Live by it.”

      Exactly. Native groups should be able to hunt and fish as they will, per the treaty. I’m glad you agree.

  15. Learn the Truth says:

    How odd is it that the native ancestors have been hunting and fishing by “there ways” all the way up to the current day, yet there are still fish and deer for future generations?

    As for the “free fire water”, are you seriously suggesting we supply the natives with alcohol to they can die? Now that is pathetic. Again, just like you said look at history, the natives are still here even though your ancestors attempted many, many ways to destroy them, including plying them with alcohol.

    1. Still fish & deer for future generations? says:

      Ever hear of red lake? The Dead Sea? Had to be restocked because of fishing their way by them? Yeah, learn the truth……

      1. Learn the Truth says:

        @Still fish & deer for future generations?
        You’re basing your comment off one lake on a closed reservation that was commercially fished? Really? Ever wonder why the tribes won’t allow commercial fishing on Mille Lacs? Or how about the harvest quotas set every year; ever wonder why they are there?

        I’ll be the first to admit Red Lake made a huge mistake, but I’ll also be first in line to say the other tribes learned from their mistake and it has not been allowed to be repeated since.

        1. Charlie says:

          Red Lake is not the only one… we can name several and you know it!!!

          1. Learn the Truth says:

            So start naming them. I’m not going to sit here with a have not have so argument with you. If you have a list of other lakes natives have netted to extinction, then by all means, enlighten me.

          2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

            PLz do… and I bet the white people are the ones who depleted the resources in those lakes not the Natives. Least Natives knew how to fix what happened and now the lake is better then ever. If we could close these lake like Red Lake did they would come back to.

      2. PMH49 says:

        Actually most of us have heard of Red Lake, (us being ‘Minnesota born and raised’) and most of us know of the effort that has gone into restoring it. The current enforcement on that lake by the tribe is damn near ferocious. The lesson was learned. There are several lakes in Minnesota that have been over harvested, most by my European ancestors. The fact that you can point out one that one was over-harvested by an indigenous population that had few other food sources does not damn that population. Most families, mine included, have pictures of our elders with strings of fish, ducks, pheasants, deer, whatever – that were harvested back in the day. Now a great many of us fish ‘catch and release’ and keep only a dozen meals or less. A lot of us hunt armed with cameras. BUT SOME OF ‘US’ eat meals provided by nature every day. The fact is some of those ‘us’ are descendants of Europeans and some of those ‘us’ are descendants of indigenous people. Get back to the point of law. There is a treaty. Does a 150 year old treaty with people no longer alive have legal merit? That is the question at hand and a few old blowhards are not going to decide that – the courts are. Sooner or later this has to go to court.

        1. Julie says:

          Does a Last Will and Testament hold water in court after the person it regards is dead?


          So does this.

        2. Learn the Truth says:

          Does land titles from 150 years ago that are passed down from one generation to the next, although the original owner is deceased, have any merit? A land title, with all the inherent rights, is pretty much what this all boils down to. The tribes released their land titles while still retaining the hunting, fishing and gathering rights. It’s very similar to the mineral rights being used by the State of MN today. The State doesn’t own the land, but has the right to harvest the minerals found in the ground. Should that change because the original owner is deceased? I don’t think it should, but you are right, this will be determined in a court of law. The last time this subject was brought before the court, the tribes won, so I’m sure whomever from the State gets to make the decision on whether to fight this or not is looking long and hard at past precedents before starting this legal battle.

          1. Moreobvious says:

            Everything indian related is now decided by money. My dad told me 20 years a go when grand casino hinckley opened, that things would be different now because the indians will have alot of money, therefore it will be less about what is right, and more about who gets paid the right amount. You can’t tell me you think that your peers arn’t greasing pockets, its not who you know its who you pay. If you don’t pay the right politicians state casinos and racinos will be on the horizon, so im just saying invest wisely or you’ll end up in the gutter. Il say im quite impressed with the 20year old kids on mystic reservation, owning 8cars and a 700k house, what success stories they are, rofl. Spend spend spend their ancestors would be so proud.

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              So your addition to this discussion is to show how jealous you are of the strides tribes have been able to make using the money freely handed to them by the patrons of their casinos? Not much of an addition, if you ask me, but what is your opinion on fishing rights, as that is the main topic of this debate?

            2. eastside_evil says:


              I do see native 20 year olds switching from the Hummer on Monday to the Escalade on Tuesday. That part is true.

              But I don’t see 700k houses on the Rez. Actually the houses are usually pretty run down and in disrepair from my own experience. Yard has little grass, two pit bulls chained to a tree, a house painted 6 different colors, and 5 cars with values over 90k.

              But your “haha, look at you” insult is uncalled for, undignified, and juvenile.

        3. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

          Yea…if your caught on the rez side of red lake your car and stuff could be taken.i remember their own members goin to jail losing their cars and stuff if caught keeping walleye when it was closed. Right before they opened the lake i saw the walleyes they would bring out and have to release. It was crazy. So the natives do know how to restore things and this state should follow their lead and do the same.

    2. Paul says:

      you been drinkig???? check your spelling!!!!!

  16. Jim says:

    Yeah, you should not be allowed to use the name “histry.” It’s not just that you can’t spell or construct a coherent sentence in English, it’s that you have absolutely no idea about the history of people in this state at all. It’s almost as if you just crushed the keyboard with your hand and then stumbled on the “submit” button.

  17. Valerie says:

    How many times has Europe changed hands in war? Don’t necessarily think they’re entitled to ANYTHING anymore. Do you know WE pay for their health insurance who live on reservations? We can’t govern them & they’re considered a nation unto their own so why don’t THEY take care of their own?

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      This isn’t about land changing hands. This is about a contract signed by two parties and one of the parties forcing the other signatory party to abide by the terms of the contract. Until you understand that concept, this whole debate will be way over your head without any attempts to land. As for health insurance, I can’t speak for all natives, but I can say I pay for my own insurance, but I would be more than happy to send you the bill to help you make a more accurate argument.

      You also can’t govern the people of Wisconsin, yet MN still makes payments to WI for certain things (easiest example is reciprocity agreements for taxes and state colleges). So why can’t we tell WI to take care of it’s own?

  18. 001 says:

    This is a signed government Treaty that was made between two sovereign nations. So IT IS VAILID!!!!!!! Oh and for all the racist comments, go and Troll somewhere else, argueing over the internet is utmost cowardly.

  19. Show me the money says:

    Please, it isn’t about fishing rights. They were hoping last year that the State would bring charges and they could settle for $$$$$ to not excercise their rights. Hardly anybody showed up to actually do the work but they would all be standing in line for the settlement. Don’t do it MN!!! Let them fish….the few that show up will tire of the work soon enough.

  20. Bubba Not says:

    Hey Whiners…
    My ancestors didn’t come to this country until the 1900s so I really don’t have a dog in this fight. From my outside perspective, the American Indians should have killed any white man the minute they set foot on these shores, but they didn’t, or were not successful in their attempts to protect what was theirs, and the white man took almost everything from them, except that prime reservation land. Since the white man couldn’t execute every Indian, they had to make some treaties in exchange for taking their land from them. The terms of the treaty are clear, and the Indians exercise their rights under those treaties.
    The people who say “times have changed, the Indians need to live in present, not the past” are the same people who refuse to live in the present when it comes to the right to bear arms. They should get to own AK47s because of a 200 year old law, but that same reasoning doesn’t apply to Indian treaties? And MN made another agreement with the Indians re:casinos in 1989 because they didn’t think casino revenue would ever amount to much. In all treaty cases, like all contracts, you stick to the terms of the contract, period. The deal is done. If you want to ask the Indians to renegotiate, go ahead, but they aren’t required to, just because you are a cry baby, or because they are actually benefiting from something that we agreed to let them have because we thought it worthless anyway. You’d scream bloody murder if they turned your turds into gold, wouldn’t you? Please, next time you want to denigrate the Indians because they get to hunt or fish at will, under the laws of the agreement made with them, try to figure out the source of your agitation. Is it real, or is it jealousy or bigotry? Just because you can get a few bubbas to agree with your wrong headed thinking, doesn’t make it right. Remember, PER THE TREATY, they do not have to follow the same laws as you do. You might also realize that you have access to dozens of societal benefits that they do not, and besides all of that, there aren’t enough Indians to make a significant dent in the populations of the game they take.

      1. Julie says:

        I bravo your bravo xD

    1. tea-pea says:

      Hey Bubba……too bad you ruined your WHOLE post by calling us “whiners”… make some very good points….but they are ruined by your self-righteous attitude….and maybe this is the reason the rest of the world has an issue with this…..
      And your point of “From my outside perspective, the American Indians should have killed any white man the minute they set foot on these shores,”
      Holds NO water….the “white man” had technology that would have killed a LOT more Indians than were already killed! The Indians back then did the SMART thing and decided to work WITH the “white man” to try to come to an agreement.
      Too bad you don’t think that way today…..I wonder how it would have ended up if a country like Russia came over in the 40’s and killed EVERYONE! Then this “problem” of yours would not even be an issue…

  21. kevin says:

    If you give them the treaty rights then you must also go back to 1855 judgement and use only the tools available to the tribes at the time. Don’t think the judge at the time knew of all the changes in technology that has taken place. Home made spears bow and arrows etc. only.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      Then I guess you can give up your ammunition with the gun powder in the bullet casing and go back to having to manually front load your rifle. I mean, that was all that was around when the 2nd amendment was written, so that should be all that is allowed to be covered by it, right?

  22. claire bear says:

    I just watched the movie Skins. I was shocked and appalled at reservation life. Not for all but for many. It’s a never ending cycle with little chance for change. Now here are some trying to makes things better and not only are some whites (my assumption) saying no, they aren’t saying it in any more of an educated or enlightened way than the white people back that instituted this treaty.

  23. captainobvious says:

    You don’t understand that when this treaty was reached they didnt know the engines would someday harvet 60,000 lbs in a week. If they fished like human beings then it would be a different story. Chiefs brag about living o0ff the land yet they do it with nets and cash. Please don’t refer to yourselves as tough people who live off the land and are hard-workers. We all better get used to these battles because as minnesota adds casinos and racinos the indians will battle harder. i just hope for your baby engines sakes you invest some money bec ause the gambling profits will soon be spread out, even the most clueless indian knows that

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      And here comes ignorance disguised as human thought. Since you seem to want to start your argument with derogatory names, the rest of your argument becomes worthless as it appears to be coming from someone who resorts to the bullying tactics found on the schoolyard playground instead of the adult discussion that’s needed.

      1. Chris says:

        If you are so wise, educated, and modern, why don’t you give it up already???

        What is your point and what do you expect to get out of it???

        That would be better than calling everyone else racist and saying that you are right and the whole world is wrong… come on!!!

        Be brave and step up for once.

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          captainobvious’s statement was derogatory as he resorted to name calling. As for what I get out of this debate is the ability to try and help others do as my name suggests and learn the truth of the matter instead of lies, rumors and innuendos. Now, what exactly would you like me to give up and what would you like me to step up to?

  24. firewater says:

    To all the «dances with whiskey» they didnt use 100 yard nets and 20ft crestliners in 1855 as well as commercializing!

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      And there weren’t automatic weapons when the 2nd amendment was written so what is your point?

      1. fishingwithrods says:

        @ truth. What’s wrong with fishing without nets. I can feed my family if my boys and myself go fishing. Many times we will invite neighbors over for a fish fry because we caught more than enough. Or is that considered work thus break into firewater time.

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          What’s wrong with fishing with nets? We have done it on many lakes for over 25 years in WI without hurting the fisheries, we do it on Lake Mille Lacs and there is still a quota of over 500,000 pounds. Or is this more of you’re upset because we can and you can’t?

          1. fishingwithrods says:

            @ truth I get enough fish already. I don’t need or want nets. Why can’t you answer a question. If you only catch what you NEED. This whole post would be pointless. BUT YOU KNOW AS DO I, ITS NOT ABOUT FEEDING ELDERS ITS ABOUT GETTING ONE UP ON THE “WHITEMAN”

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              Who said I didn’t catch what I need? And this has nothing to do with getting one up on the “whiteman”. This has to do with providing a protein source to many people with little to no cost. Basic economics. If I can get 200 lbs of fish during the season, my family gets to eat meat all year, and not just my immediate family, but my aunts, uncles, my father and mother, and some of my cousins who do not have the opportunity to set a net. No, I’m not going to turn my back on that opportunity. I would be insane to do that, just as you would if you were given the chance and declined. So, does that help answer your question?

              Oh, and by the way, I also hook and line fish in the summer, same as regular anglers. I just have a different quota of fish I can keep and I’m not restricted to a slot limit.

              1. fishingwithrods says:

                Sounds like you changed your numbers. 200 lbs from 500,000 go ahead and make it sound good.

                1. Learn the Truth says:

                  500,000 pounds is the total limit of safe walleye harvest for the entire Lake Mille Lacs for the entire 2011 season, which is split with 397,500 going to regular hook and line fish harvesting used by non native anglers and 142,500 going to tribal quotas. Here’s the link for the story on the allocation:


                  200lbs was an average number for how much I take from the lake in my nets on a yearly basis. Sometimes it’s slightly higher, sometimes it’s slightly lower, but that is MY individual harvest. Does that help explain it better?

                2. fishingwithrods says:

                  @truth I would love to debate this more but I’m heading to work so I can buy groceries. My boys love fish but that’s not all they want

                3. Seeker of the truth says:

                  Hey Learn the Truth
                  The result on Mille Lacs Lake is that fish return to the same spawning area each year. As the Walleye are netted each spring during spawning season along the shores of Mille Lacs, fewer Walleye return each year. What is now happening is Small Mouth Bass are taking over Walleye spawning areas.

                  Mille Lacs A.K.A. “Dead Sea”

                4. Learn the Truth says:

                  @Seeker of the truth
                  How odd, you claim the lake is dead, yet the safe walleye harvest limit is set for over 500,000 pounds. Seems you may be a bit mistaken there, but if I’m wrong, please show me the evidence so I may become properly enlightened.

  25. valerie says:

    TRUTH I said we have to pay for the health insurance for the ones living on reservations. No, I don’t want to pay your bill- we have to pay for enough losers already who won’t take care of themselves.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      First, paying insurance is a moot point in this discussion as we’re talking about fish harvesting. Second, unless you have the proof to back up your claims, then I would recommend you stop throwing around those accusations or you come across looking like a bigoted ignorant fool. Was that your intent? I didn’t think so.

      1. Slim says:

        Again, what do you want from us…

        we know that it is NOT the fish you are catching (netting)!!!

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          I never said I wanted anything from you. Although actually looking at this situation with an open mind instead of with jealousy clouding your vision would be nice, but I don’t see that as a realistic goal so I would never ask for that.

  26. me says:

    Such a shame that over a hundred since this treaty was signed, many white people are still just as stupid, ignorant and prejudiced.

  27. valerie says:

    If you’re saying the health insurance part is wrong – YOU better check your facts. Seems you’re the ignorant (blissfully)one.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      I’m not the one making accusations I need to back up, that would be you. So, if you have proof of your accusations, then please, by all means, provide it. Otherwise, stick to the debate at hand and stop throwing in your bigoted feelings.

  28. Chuck says:

    I don’t know all of the arguments for revising the treaty, however, the laws that we as non natives live with now are MUCH MORE RESTRICTIVE than they were in 1855. We had to make changes because of technology, does it not make sense that the natives do the same, OR, use the methods that were the technology of the day. ONE OR THE OTHER!!!!!

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      You’re saying that because you had to do something, the tribes should as well? Is that correct? As for restrictions, the tribes do have more restrictions than they did when the treaty was written. We have quotas we have to stay within. We can only take so much. We have requirements for our equipment, including the size of the nets, the size of the buoys, even the amount of inches in between the knots on the net. I can promise those restrictions were not in place in my ancestors days. So what exactly is irritating you about this? Because we get to use nets? Because we get to use modern methods? What exactly?

  29. Simple Truth says:

    The white man wants to control everything, he thinks he knows what is best for all people…Just look at the country…He stole this country and now he gives it away…Say what you will, the fact remains….. We didn’t have these problems here before 1492.

    1. Matsuie says:

      If it was not for us white folks taking over this country and making something of it you would now be all dead slaves under Japan or German rulers. You owe us white folks big time native americans.

      1. Julie says:


        2 words describe you to a T.

        Ignorant Fool.

      2. Learn the Truth says:

        “You owe us white folks big time native americans.”

        Wow, if that isn’t the most backward thing I’ve read in these forums. I mean I’m stunned. Are you seriously claiming that because your ancestors came over here, stole our land, tried to decimate our population using disease, weapons, forced acclimation, and finally failed Native policy, and then forced us onto reservations of land that were almost completely worthless to us because of the lack of resources we needed to survive, we now owe you because you did it before another country could? Really?

  30. Seeker of the truth says:

    Hey Learn the Truth
    The result on Mille Lacs Lake is that fish return to the same spawning area each year. As the Walleye are netted each spring during spawning season along the shores of Mille Lacs, fewer Walleye return each year. What is now happening is Small Mouth Bass are taking over Walleye spawning areas.

    Mille Lacs A.K.A. “Dead Sea”

  31. PMH49 says:

    It is a lot easier for the side that won to say ‘get over it’ than it is for the side that lost to actually ‘get over it’. That is why we still see all those confederate flags in the rear windows of southern pickup trucks, and why the native population of ancient Asian immigrants want their fishing rights. ( I do not cede ‘first Americans’)
    The fact is that there is a treaty signed by the US government that seems to favor the ‘Indian’ argument. I am completely in favor of letting the courts decide this. It would seem to be a choice between ‘the word of the US government doesn’t mean spit – you lost means you lose’ or the US government honors its word. I do not believe the treaty envisioned modern fish and game harvesting techniques, but there really is no clause for revoking the agreement should flashlights, outboard motors, nylon nets, and the like be invented. Short of starting the wars all over again, only the courts can settle this and someone is not going to be happy with the settlement and hold a grudge for 150 years. But by then the only fish will be Asian carp – again thanks to the government.

  32. Lazy says:

    give me a break! they get assistance/welfare….housing, gambling,no taxes, but won’t protect their house in the event of mother nature (like in fargo/moorehead) gut their house to sell the cooper, move in many families so they can live off the GOV/state cheaper but want to be able to “CLAIM IT’S THEIR RIGHT” to kill almost as much as they keep?

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      So what exactly is your argument here? And how does any of what you said have to do with fish harvesting rights?

    2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

      LOL…. ignorant. just plain ignorant, I get no housing,no monies from gambling,and i pay taxes as you do. We get nothing more then the white people.

  33. I like learn the truth says:

    Learn the truth- I like how you’re standing up for the natives and how other people can’t stand you. I am not a native nor white person but agree with you. It’s sad to see that people can’t catch fish so they have to blame some one. People here need to stop talking about casinos, health care, etc etc etc… Geeze… What a bunch of whiny babies! Then to now, one way or another nets are going to get bigger, canoes made of wood will turn into modern boats and we all eat. Learn the truth, can you tell me if you’ve netted any 10 lbs plus walleye? Or maybe 15’pounders? I just want to know.. That’s all.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      @I like learn the truth
      No, I have never netted a walleye bigger than about 7 pounds, at least that I can remember. I have netted larger northerns and I have pulled an 18 pound muskee from my net, but we’re not allowed to keep the muskee, so I only have pictures and then we released it back.

  34. eatit says:

    Learn the truth, you answer easy questions but dodge others. You’re are a engine you don’t work, you mean nothing to this earth, invest your cash chief casinos and racinos are coming, we should of finished this mutt breed off when we had the chance.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      And I feel sorry for people like you who seem to think that if you lose an argument you need to resort to petty schoolyard bullying tactics. I’ll put some tobacco out for you in the hopes you gain some perspective.

      1. Mrlayaround says:

        Please explain when argument was lost, and i dont smoke its disgusting. Its easy for you to speculate on this 24/7 because you have no job to report to like a normal person

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          First, laying tobacco is not for smoking but an offering to Gitchi-Manitou, or Great Spirit, for seeking guidance on some question.

          Second, you lost this argument the minute you resorted to name calling (“You’re are a engine…”, “invest your cash chief”…)

          Third, your tactic of accusing someone you do not know of not having a job or being normal is an old tired bullying tactic used by children who lose an argument on the playground. If all you have to offer to this discussion is name calling and attempted insults, then why are you here?

  35. rog1 says:

    hey truth what r u a professer or what if natives want jobs why dont they work at the casino like they said they wanted to instead of mostly whites doing it futher more why dont u put the fish eggs back in the lake after u collect and hatct them 4 the future

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      According to tribal conservation code, we are not allowed to return anything to the lake unless it is alive. Meaning if we attempt to return a muskee to the lake from our net, if it doesn’t swim off on its own, we cannot release it. And the health of the walleye population is no concern right now for the lake, evident by the 500,000+ pounds for safe harvest level, so there is no need to worry about returning the eggs to the lake. I can’t speak of the future, but I can assume with the management in place now, if the lake was in trouble, the harvest level would be adjusted to reflect that.

  36. John C says:

    we’re talking about a treaty that was signed over 200 years ago. Situations change. The smart thing to do is find a happy medium. Fishing in MN has turned into a business. So we have 2 competeing “businesses” looking for the same thing, money. Both sides need to get together and meet half way. There’s always room for compromise. Heck, we have over 10,000 lakes, plenty of fish for everyone

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      @John C
      Yes, the treaty was signed over 150 years ago (not 200, but close) but that should not negate the contract. If that is your logic, then our Constitution would also be negated because of time.

      As for a happy medium, with the joint management of Lake Mille Lacs by the tribes, MN DNR and GLIFWC as a proper example of how negotiation can be accomplished, I don’t see why any other lake could not be managed the same way.

      1. eatit says:

        Learn the truth do you breathe on your own or by machine? So every contract signed be it 1 day ago or 150 years ago is set in stone. You know what i dont gamble at casinos except for in vegas, but i would go to a casino in downtown because it would be regulated better than an indian run casino where the gambling authority is payed off by chief dragging knuckles. So are your children gonna go to school or work when there older, or just lay around like you. Id push a rabid dog out of the way of a speeding bus b4 you, please respond with your standard you say mean things, therefore i cant answer you.

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          What is the point of responding to your ignorance? Your questions and insults are completely meaningless to this discussion, therefore not worth an answer. Now, if you would like to debate fishing rights, then by all means, submit your opinion on that topic. But resorting to attempted insults is nothing more than a kneejerk illogical reaction by someone who has nothing to add to the debate and only wishes to inflame emotions and get reactions.

        2. eastside_evil says:


          If you’re a white man, I’m ashamed your skin tone resembles mine.

          White people with brains do NOT share your opinions on this, nor your horrid insults. You are an embarrassment to your community, and to me.

  37. Julie says:

    I like Learn the Truth too.
    I respect that he fights the derogatory remarks, bigoted remarks and idiocy with good sound reason, and he or she does not flip out and start calling names unlike some people.

    I am a small part Lakotah, too small to qualify for any financial ties to a reservation. That does not diminish my pride in being a small part native.

    I feel that the treaties even written oh so long ago are a contract that was signed and entered into contract with no funky stipulations.
    Native customs regarding caring for the Elders and ones who cannot fish or hunt go back in history, Learn the Truth you go! To see someone Proud to follow the old ways at least in using the fish you catch not only to benefit your immediate family makes me proud to be my tiny bit part Native.

    So what they didnt have motor boats and current equipment back then.
    The language of the contract did not leave any openings for rewritings.
    It is legal and binding contract.

    Get used to it.

    Megwetch Learn the Truth!
    If I had a way to contact you I think I might be able to learn alot.
    I wouldn’t ask because then you would get swamped by hate mail from some of the closed minded ones.

  38. Dan says:

    If this is providing for your family then why do they dump whole fish into farmers fields?

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      I cannot speak for all natives, but I can only speak for myself and I have never wasted any fish from my net. Do not base your opinion of all from the actions of a few.

    2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

      what the hell you talking about… lol I been living on the leech lake rez for yrs and never seen nor heard of that…

      1. dan says:

        i live near mille lacs and it happened last year and one recks it for all

  39. eastside_evil says:

    I’m embarrassed by the remarks of hateful, redneck Minnesotans resorting to saying “engines” and “don’t have jobs” and making quips about alcoholism and other insulting statements about natives.

    Seriously, why are you doing that? Are you so upset by the netting that you can’t construct a simple sentence without trying to mock the other person?

    You should be ashamed of yourselves. I know I am.

    1. Factpointer says:

      You dont even live in Minnesota so this has notihng to do with you even.

    2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

      Miigwetch…… People hate what they dont know. they need to educate themselves on the true facts of the Native people.. then come back and debate this topic.

  40. stillobvious says:

    I already said you people brag of your skills to survive in the wild live off the land, yet you resort to high tech net fisihing. Wow you think that 20year old has made strides for the tribe buy blowing money as fast as they get it, so your actually proud of them? Please tell me your proud of these people who collect checks and spend nonstop. I see you don’t deny you dont work, and also sidestepped your kids future, listen just don’t compare modern day indians to those who did live off the land and tried to do something with themselves, unlike the check collectors.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      And why is it any of your or my business how someone spends their money? The strides I was talking about are the fact that the tribes now has the means to provide that 20 year old with money to spend. What he or she decides to do with is their choice. I don’t tell you how to spend your paycheck, you shouldn’t tell others how to spend theirs.

      As for a job, yes, I’m employed and I’m also educated. My children have no bearing on this discussion so I will not respond to any remarks concerning them. Now, do you have a specific opinion you would like to discuss concerning fishing rights, or are you more interested in bashing what you see as wasteful spending?

    2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

      Yea… your pretty ignorant. High tech netting…LOL I been netting and its no where near high tech…If we had our choice we would live off the land but if you remember most of our land is gone and YOU people live on it.DUH!!! The check collectors are part of 1 tribe… the rest of us do what we gotta do for ourselves. The Rez helps us no more then your govt does. we get no special treatment,if i do PLZ let me know about it.

  41. Factpointer says:

    Learn the truth i go back and read your comments, some1 asks you whats wrong with fishing w poles? You say whats wrong with nets. Just another example of how your breed enjoys doing things the easy way, You’ve become the new black man, all about what we can get for doing nothing. Go pat yourself on your back, you are making your anscestors so proud, They’d be turning over in their graves if 1 had been dug for them to start with

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      I was asking the same question of the person who wanted to know about fishing with poles vs fishing with nets to prove a point, that there is no difference aside from how much can be taken at once. And so you know, I do use a pole to fish during the summer.

      As for the rest of your statement, again racially tinged remarks used to attempt to inflame others only demeans your arguments and makes you appear bigoted and ignorant. If that is how you want to appear to the world, I must say you’re doing an excellent job.

      1. dan says:

        so not only do you get nets but you can have poles to and it is sad you take 1000s of a white mans limits of fish in just a few nets

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          Seriously? I think you need to reread your post because how I read it, you just said I take a white mans limits of fish. Are you honestly suggesting I am now taking fish away from white men? Really? I didn’t know that walleye were only limited to white men.

          And yes, tribal members are allowed to fish with nets, poles, and spears. It’s allowed within the treaty rights granted to the tribe as payment for their ceded territory.

          1. dan says:

            no we can take 4 fish and the natives can take fish buy the tons how is that equal

            1. Learn the Truth says:

              Here’s the entire breakdown for you and you tell me what is or isn’t equal, alright? The entire quota for safe walleye harvest for Lake Mille Lacs is 540,000 pounds. That is the total amount that can be taken by you, me,. everyone. Now here is the breakdown by tribes and regular anglers. Tribes are allowed to take 142,500 pounds. Regular anglers are allowed to take 397,500 pounds, or about 2 1/2 times MORE than the tribes are allotted to take. So please, you tell me, how is that fair?

              As for your question, you are allowed to take 4 fish a day, but you can continue to take your 4 fish a day until the entire 397,500 pounds are taken. Tribal members can take whatever their nets can carry per day and the average amount in a net is roughly 30 to 40 pounds of walleye. Now, yes, the tribal member can take that 30 to 40 pounds per day, same as your 4 fish per day, but the tribal member is limited to 142,500 total for tribes, so once that quota is hit, tribal harvest ends. Still sound like an unfair deal to you? You get 2 1/2 times MORE than the tribes, yet because the tribes don’t waste time in their harvest and harvest right away, it’s not fair. Sure, and I have some ocean front property for sale in Nevada too.

  42. Julie says:

    I like Learn the Truth too.
    I respect that he fights the derogatory remarks, bigoted remarks and idiocy with good sound reason, and he or she does not flip out and start calling names unlike some people.

    I am a small part Lakotah, too small to qualify for any financial ties to a reservation. That does not diminish my pride in being a small part native.

    I feel that the treaties even written oh so long ago are a contract that was signed and entered into contract with no funky stipulations.
    Native customs regarding caring for the Elders and ones who cannot fish or hunt go back in history, Learn the Truth you go! To see someone Proud to follow the old ways at least in using the fish you catch not only to benefit your immediate family makes me proud to be my tiny bit part Native.

    So what they didnt have motor boats and current equipment back then.
    The language of the contract did not leave any openings for rewritings.
    It is legal and binding contract.

    Get used to it.

    Megwetch Learn the Truth!
    If I had a way to contact you I think I might be able to learn alot.
    I wouldn’t ask because then you would get swamped by hate mail from some of the closed minded ones.

  43. 001 says:

    Yeah yeah everyone gets all up in arms about a few indians fishing a few fish or hunting a few dear, well what about Wall street stealing trillions or a never-ending war in Iraq, Wheres the perspective. Native Americans Service Members serve this country in war at a higher-ratio than any other race. Shit, my Grandpa was in WWII, the Navy and My dad served in Vietnam both Native American Veterans, and yet this country won’t honor these Treaty Agreements they made with the Indians. For a so called Christan nation, this is a travesty.

  44. Tea's casino says:

    ****BAN GRAND CASINO!!!!*****

    The Ojibwe have gotten away with MURDER for YEARS! It HAS to stop!

    The fishing opener pumps MILLIONS into their casino’s! WHY even FIGHT this! Why? Because they feel they can get away with ANYTHING!
    And eastside is RIGHT! These people get $25,000 a MONTH and do NOTHING for it! They let their houses go to hell…they default on their loans…..they cost us MILLIONS! Yet other Ojibwe members STARVE and are homeless!!!
    REMEMBER the story of a land owner in Northern MN finding TONS of fish guts on his land? And it was traced back to the Ojibwe if I’m NOT MISTAKEN!!!

    Bottom line…..they have been on the “take” for TOO LONG! Time for EQUAL rights!

    PASS the casino bill in MPLS….TAX the casino’s like every other business in MN! THEN we can talk about your fishing “rights”

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      @Tea’s casino
      First, the owner’s of Grand Casino are the Mille Lacs Band and they do not hand out the money to their members like the Mdewakanton do so there aren’t any band members getting $25,000 a month. Second, who claims we can get away with anything? Third, how can you tax a business that is located on sovereign land? That is akin to you wanting to tax WI businesses for MN as well. Fourth, we have both fishing rights and casinos because of 2 separate contracts, so trying to get rid of one won’t stop either if history holds. Fifth, are you seriously upset because some tribal members get money which is freely given to them by patrons of their casinos? Last time I checked, there aren’t any tribal members holding guns to the public’s head forcing them to go to the casino. And lastly, do you have anything reasonable to add to this debate, or are you only here to try and stir the pot of emotions for reactionary value?

      1. Tea's truth says:

        @learn the truth……
        I am sorry for the “Murder” term….it was too strong of a word for this argument….
        #1-I understand that the Indian Casino’s do a lot of good with the money generated, but tell me where the money does go from the Grand Casino chains? Does it go back to supporting the economy? Supporting the DNR who stocks these lakes? I would like to know where the MILLIONS go.
        #2-Is Leach Lake “sovereign land?” If not….how can you propose laws that pertain to you and not to other people?
        #3- I would be JUST fine with Indian Casino’s (And I do visit them time to time..I’ll be honest) if they didn’t FIGHT tooth and nail to STOP the formation of a state run casino! The State has been MORE than cooperative for YEARS on this matter. I still choose to go and spend money there. I just feel it’s TIME for there to be some changes….either taxes on casino earnings or some good American competition. Your right..they don’t “hold a gun” to anyones head…but you spend MILLIONS fighting the taxation of them.

        I am sorry if you feel my arguments are not “valid”. I think as the original “Americans” your history and culture is important to keep alive! I just feel it’s time to CHANGE! Not too long ago Woman could not vote…Blacks sat at the back of the bus, but we all changed for the better and allowed EQUAL rights for a “Equal America”.

        I am sure you are a very proud person, and you do a good job of validating your points…..but for every person like you there is a person who abuses the rules and flaunts the situation they are in ONLY due to their race!

        I was born here in 1970…..someone born here in 1980 has the SAME rights as I do…..I just feel it’s about time regardless of the fact if your Indian, Black, White, we are treated equal!

        Keep your “sovereign land” and keep the Spirit of your heritage alive, but please change with the times as well.

        1. Learn the Truth says:

          @Tea’s truth
          First, the money from the Grand Casino chain in MN goes to the Mille Lacs Band. 25% goes for long term savings, 35% goes to band members, and 40% goes for government services. So yes, the full 100% goes to the tribe and it’s broken down by those numbers in accordance with the tribes gaming compact agreed to by the BIA. The government services covered by the amount are the same government services provided by the State of MN, including roads, water, low income housing, education, health and human services, DNR, etc. As for stocking the lakes, the MN DNR does not stock Lake Mille Lacs with any fish other than muskellunge. The harvest limit for walleye is determined by a joint agreement between the tribes, MN DNR and GLIFWC in accordance to the MN DNR’s scientific studies on the sustainability of the lake.

          Second, both Mille Lacs and Leech Lake bands are their own sovereign governments with their own rights to manage their people and resources. Yes, both tribes are allowed to make laws, statutes and regulations their tribal members are bound by. That is how they both have their own conservation codes.

          Third, the tribes as well as the local economies the tribe’s casinos support will always fight tooth and nail to maintain the jobs and economic benefits their casinos bring. This has nothing to do with being uncooperative but more with good business. Let me ask you this: if you were party to a contract saying you were granted the right to exclusively have a casino and there would only be other competition from a few other tribes, wouldn’t you be insulted if after proving how profitable the casino could be, which no one thought you could do, the other party to the contract decided they were going to try and force you to renegotiate that contract because they now wanted back what they promised you to begin with? As for taxes on casino profits, look at it this way: you pay taxes to the State of MN and in return they provide you with services. The tribes are not allowed to tax due to federal law, so they have to raise their own government funding from other sources. The profits of the casino go directly to the tribes and are then dispersed from there; basically the profits are 100% taxed, the taxes just don’t go to the MN government.

          The hunting fishing and gathering rights the tribes enjoy are from a contract the tribes have with the government. When the tribes agreed to cede their land (sell, barter, however is easiest to understand), they kept those inherent rights. It’s very similar to the State of MN maintaining mineral rights to harvest any minerals found within the state. So to say the rights are based on race is illogical and race baiting to inflame others against the tribes. This isn’t about inequality due to race, it’s a contract, no more, no less.

          1. Tea's 2nd job says:

            Well..#1″ MN DNR does not stock Lake Mille Lacs with any fish other than muskellunge.” REALLY? I do not think this is true…but I can not find facts to back this…

            #2- You never answered my question on if the LAKE is ” “sovereign land?” or ALL of the land around it. And we all know it’s not….

            I guess I’m sorry to say you can spin this how ever you like…you seem like a very smart guy who does know about these issues somewhat…..but the bottom the citizens of MN for the MOST part feel there needs to be changes!

            I guess it’s just the sign of the times…..

            Well…on to my 2nd job to provide for my family…..I am guessing you are on the rez payroll?

    2. Patricia Winterfeldt says:

      Your Ignorant……………..all I have to say is do some research and then come back and talk your nonsense.Your talking to one of those OJIBWES and PLZZZ tell me what I get away with?? and MURDER???we wont go there.

  45. bobo says:

    A deal is a deal and a bad deal is a bad deal. There was nothing in the treaty from restricting the Indians from technological advances in catching fish and hunting game. But one of the questions is this: Was there really a deal? Some Indians came together and signed a treaty way back when. Who says they spoke for the Indians in the tribe? Who says they were empowered to make an agreement? What evidence exists for that? None! The cheifs that came together could not read and write and spoke no English. The whole thing is so muddled that no one can make sense of it. If this were any normal contract today the courts would immediately throw it out and say that no contract existed. But because it involves Native American rights and Political Correctness the courts uphold it so they can feel good at cocktail parties. Their liberal friends can slap them on the back and tell them what a good job they are doing.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      Here’s a link to the treaty:

      The language is very simple and easy to understand. There is no ambiguity to what the contract says. As for whether the treaty is valid, the Supreme Court says it is so the rights granted in the treaty are valid. To now claim that we didn’t know if the tribal chiefs understood what they were signing so it’s invalid is a non-argument. The tribes today claim the treaty is valid and the tribes are one of the parties to the treaty, therefore it’s valid. There’s nothing more complicated with this situation than that.

  46. Valerie says:

    What do you mean accusations. It’s a fact- it would be easy to verify. Ask any clinic or welfare office – they probably know who gets “free” health care from the US government. As for before 1492- PLEASE – you were your own worst enemies always killing each other. I’m bored with this & you have some learnin’ to do other than fishing rights -unless you’re somehow embarrassed by the truth? You are right about one thing- this doesn’t have much to do about the article. Bye

  47. Learn the Truth says:

    Again, if you’re going to throw your opinion in, make sure to state it’s just your opinion. If you’re going to enter what you claim are facts, provide the information to back it up. It’s that simple. Claiming everyone knows something shows it shouldn’t be hard to provide some proof of your accusations, now should it?

    @Tea’s 2nd Job:
    I posted a link to the MN DNR website that had the lake report for Mille Lacs earlier. I would post it again, but I’m on my phone. Just google MN DNR lake finder and it should take you to the DNR’s lake report search engine. Then search for Mille Lacs and you’ll have the report. The report shows only muskellunge has been stocked in Mille Lacs for the last 10 years which is as far back as the report goes.

    As for “sovereign land”, I believe Leech Lake is within reservation boundaries of the Leech Lake Band. Is that what you meant by “sovereign land”?

    Since the people of MN are not a party to the treaty nor does the State of MN have any jurisdiction over changing the treaty rights per the Supreme Court’s decision in 1999, then why should we have to give up our rights granted in exchange for the lands we ceded?

    As for my employment: that’s not part of this discpussion and has nothing to do with fish harvesting rights so I will not be discussing that with you.

  48. Teddy says:

    Figuring what land was worth way back, or even NOW- and all the free health care people on the reservations get from THE US GOVERNMENT (even though they are their own government but don’t take care of their own) I would say you are ahead about ONE BILLION DOLLARS

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      And do you have the data to back up your statements? Also, the State of MN is a government, similar to tribes, yet the State receives federal assistance, similar to tribes. So why are you not crying about the State of MN “take[ing] care of their own”?

  49. valerie says:

    So, whether health insurance is part of the treaty or not-(you’re getting closer to finding what you say you can’t but probably already know) you are way ahead of the rest of us Schmucks who have to pay property tax & our own health insurance whiich can be $600.00 a month or more. You actually did answer the question of whether you work or not. Just like Tea’s 2nd job i have to work a 2nd job after the 1st 40 hrs a week. Got to pay for the Somali’s and all other people who may or may not deserve free health care. Thought by your first couple comments you might have been well read or travelled. Hqve you ever been to Gallup NM? Full of drunken Indians laying all over town. You’re a passionate guy & maybe you can help them somehow. Don’t say this to be hurtful , after all Russia has a national crisis with alcohol & Afghanistan is becoming a country addicted to the dope they sell to the rest of the world. I saw part of Off the reservation last night. It’s good for all of us to be proud of our heritage, but what I heard made me feel like the constant -you can be a good Indian- you can accomplish something even though you’re an Indian is actually degrading.Shouldn’t it be obvious to an Indian just like any other race that there were & are role models that they have from the past & present to look to? Even I know there’s been plenty of smart, accomplished, athletic, heroic Native Americans. In all the wars of the US & before to name a couple examples.

    1. Learn the Truth says:

      And your little tirade was for what purpose again? You once again threw out information without any data to provide verification. Here, let me be more specific for you. You said “whether health insurance is part of the treaty or not-(you’re getting closer to finding what you say you can’t but probably already know) you are way ahead of the rest of us Schmucks who have to pay property tax & our own health insurance whiich can be $600.00 a month or more.” Now, to verify the information in this statement, which I’m assuming is natives are ahead of the rest of “us Schmucks” in not having to pay property tax or health insurance which can total about $600 a month or more, you show us … what exactly? That you claim to have a second job? That you watched some show? That you think there are problems in Russia and Afghanistan? What exactly did you provide to prove your statements besides your own conjecture and innuendo? Give me a link to your data, point me to the book you read, show me where you are getting your information besides asking me if I’ve been to a town where in your opinion, is full of “drunken Indians laying all over town”. Only then will you have actually contributed anything besides your own bigoted and prejudices opinions to this debate.

      And again, like I told Tea, my employment is not a part of this debate, so I will not be discussing that here with any of you.

  50. RPM says:

    So can you release any fish over 17 inches with a gill net? As an angler I can and MUST by law (or whatever the slot is). So a fish gone at or after spawn isn’t really the problem as I see it. It’s that if I keep a 14 inch fish it doesn’t hurt the fishery as much as keeping a 24 inch spawning fish. Is that not correct?

    1. RPM says:

      And by the way, most contracts are in the “spirit of the contract” if not completely spelled out……..

  51. Swoodoo Billigfluege 2billige Fluege Buchen2 says:

    Branch Lip,title thing chairman release upon broad deep leg although voice whole good degree membership bank chain display rich local unit ready her affair language surface head claim animal approach liberal village fight possibly nuclear more once name conflict there person award obtain smile other criminal above report flight if most institute decision circle nurse arrive share down future absence unit baby fresh economy count piece prefer title bedroom entry bank tiny level discover death station it back repeat means answer program dress offer particularly agree desk notion back now award interview figure force

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Watch & Listen LIVE